AI in HR - Recruiter Bots vs Candidate Bots
Even with AI filters, great candidates are falling through. Read how clearer “non-negotiables” + ChatGPT beat most hiring tools — without a system overhaul.
📌 Opening Insight: Bots vs Bots - A headache for Recruiters
AI has created a strange new battlefield in hiring: Recruiter Bots vs Candidate Bots.
Candidates now use GPTs to personalize resumes, insert JD keywords, and apply to as many roles as possible. Some tools have automated the entire discovery to resume personalization to the application process.
The recruiters are getting more applications than ever. As per LinkedIn, every minute, over 11000 job applications are being submitted. Obviously, recruiters are resorting to AI tools that filter out irrelevant candidates. And yet, most recruiters say the same thing: “All the resumes look the same.”
Is this good or bad? I don’t know, but one thing is clear: Great candidates are still getting rejected while hiring managers still have to take more interviews.
I worked with recruiters to solve this and always found a simpler solution than using expensive AI tools and revamping the entire HRMS & ATS process.
The Non-Negotiables + ChatGPT- Things that don’t show up in the JD but matter most.
Examples:
One of the last two experiences must be in supply chain or e-commerce.
Should have spent over 3 years in one of the last 3 stints.
Should be from a product-based company rather than service
The candidate should strictly be in a specific location set. Relocation reduces probability to join.
LLMs are great at understanding resumes and filtering the candidates basis requirement, be it from JD or the non-negotiables. Providing ChatGPT with resumes, the JD, and non-negotiables outperformed most AI tools we’d used.
Non-negotiables improved hiring process by over 3X in my last company. Recruiters were able to find relevant resumes, hiring managers were taking right interviews, and were able to close positions faster. We achieved this without switching the HR tools. Without expensive AI bots. and without much technical work.
The thing is that AI is as good as the inputs provided. Better boundaries in, better results out.
🔍 Strategic Signals This Week
📰 DeepSeek has data privacy concerns; Banned in Germany & Italy already
A German official has recently asked Google and Apple to remove DeepSeek from their app stores in Germany. As per him, DeepSeek did not provide convincing evidence that users’ data was protected according to EU laws. Just so you know, Italy has already banned DeepSeek from their app stores citing similar reasons.
Why it matters for CXOs:
The concerns related to Data Privacy and compliance are real as AI companies are doing everything to get more access to data. If you are planning to use any AI tool inside the company, make sure to understand the data privacy terms.
📰 Over 40% CIOs do not intend to start AI projects before 2026.
As per research, less than 25% leaders have implemented AI project while have already decided to pursue once the hype settles down.
Why it matters for you:
Tech leaders know that jumping in the trend and splurging their already tight budgets may not result in org value. Better to wait and watch.
The best in AI is yet to come. Leaders should spend some time and efforts into understanding business problems; process flows where AI can be implemented.
💬 Leadership Signal
“AI allows you to do any job. Because it allows you to be a passable UX designer, a decent SFX animator, and so on. But it doesn’t necessarily mean you can do that job well, as a specialist is often needed for polish..”
Balaji Shrinivasan - founder, Network School
📬 Know someone who’d value this? Forward it.
👥 Want to suggest an exec to feature? Hit reply or message me on LinkedIn.
You’re reading Model in Motion - where modern leaders make sense of AI, without the noise.